[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Linex need serious concurent version control software ?

From: david
Subject: Re: Linex need serious concurent version control software ?
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 11:53:28 -0600 (CST)

> I just wander if cvs can make merging kylix project files?
> My guess is that it will make a mess.
I've never seen a Kylix project file, so I can't answer.  If you could
give several lines of an example (of course, if it doesn't work with
lines, then CVS can't merge it), perhaps we could answer that.

The other technique is to try it and see.
> If this is so, then there is a need to restrict concurrent programmers from
> editing Kylix project files at same time, but allow editing of .cpp files.
This can be done with (a) CVS's current editor facilities, and (b)
an enforced policy.  CVS is not a replacement for responsible
employees.  If you can't trust your employees not to violate policies
and mess files up, you need to fire them and replace them.  (There's
lots of developers looking for jobs right now, so that shouldn't
be too difficult.)

BTW, if developers edit Kylix project files with a text editor, it's
almost certainly going to be useful for CVS merging.
> Cvs version 1.11.2 is not capable of during that selective restriction.
> I think there is a time to write serious version control that will allow
> using Kylix by more then one person for programming.
CVS will work just fine, as far as you've described it.
> If you ready know HOW TO MAKE restrictive editing for only some files
> using cvs, then post it on the news.
> I think this is impossible with cvs, and we need better tool.
Easy.  Use the "editor" facility to let everybody know who's doing
what, and have some policies to follow.  If somebody consistently
violates policy, fire him or her.  With the job market what it is,
I'm sure that person will make an excellent example for the others. 
> PS Do you now that by "cvs checkout your_project" in another directory
> you are now longer reported by "cvs editors" despite you have
> files open for editing with command " cvs edit" in first directory.
If you're not reported by "cvs editors" for what you have "cvs edit"ed,
then that's a bug.  If it doesn't report you as an editor for a file
you haven't "cvs edit"ed, then that's normal behavior.

> We need more serious accounting in version control software.
Alternately, we need version control people who understand what
version control can and cannot do.

Now building a CVS reference site at

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]